24小时热门版块排行榜    

查看: 3399  |  回复: 61
当前只显示满足指定条件的回帖,点击这里查看本话题的所有回帖

jyajian

金虫 (小有名气)


[交流] 第一次遇到棘手的审稿意见,难缠啊

第一次修改意见(第二个审稿人)
Some aggregation operators for aggregating XXXXXXX  are proposed and then applied to resolve multiple attribute group decision making. However, the main results of this paper are just the simple extensions of the known ones. Therefore, I don't think this paper has enough novelty to be published. There are also other problems:

1. Definitions 5, 6, 7 and 8 should be given explanations, why does the paper give such definitions to denote the score and accuracy functions of XXXXXXX  ?

(第三个审稿人)
Notation sometimes is not easy to follow. Please check whether it is possible to ease the presentation.- I suggest to improve the section related to the experimentation of the proposed method by adding a comparison with at least one competing approach, and enlarging the test to some other possibly synthetic scenario to allow the reader to better catch the effectiveness of the authors' proposal.


第二次修改意见(第二个审稿人)
The interval-valued intuitionistic trapezoidal fuzzy number is unclear in practical applications. The practical meaning must be explained with a concrete example (case). The numerical example is too simple, which can not be used to demonstrate the approach. More complex case illustration is necessary. (我不太清楚,为什么要用复杂的算例, 我觉得我算例已经分析的很清楚,而且从理论上证明了)

(第三个审稿人)
The revised version of the paper have improved the contribution. I still believe that a comparison with at least one competing approach, and enlarging the test to some other possibly synthetic scenario to allow the reader to better catch the effectiveness of the authors' proposal may improve the paper.



第三次修改意见(第二个审稿人)
It is clear that the authors have not answered my two questions given in the comments.



(第三个审稿人)
The revised version of the paper has addressed my comment about the comparison with competing approaches. However, this comparison is made at theoretical level. I wonder whether this may be also added in the example illustrated by the authors. After this the paper can be accepted for publication.  (我在算例当中已经做了比较分析, 不知道为什么审稿人只是说我做了理论分析)
回复此楼

» 收录本帖的淘帖专辑推荐

论文投稿交流的收集 审稿意见

» 猜你喜欢

» 抢金币啦!回帖就可以得到:

查看全部散金贴

已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

jyajian

金虫 (小有名气)


兄弟们, 给点意见吧。 如果不行的话,打算撤稿了, 这个论文来回折腾16个月了。
11楼2013-03-08 19:37:46
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
查看全部 62 个回答

makunjida

至尊木虫 (知名作家)



jyajian(金币+1): 谢谢参与
你这个意见很难改,我如果还能改的话,我建议你静下来,再想想。因为你思路限定在现在想法中了。出去活动下,过一两天再改

[ 发自手机版 http://muchong.com/3g ]
12楼2013-03-08 19:38:41
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
简单回复
nandi22126楼
2013-03-08 19:26   回复  
jyajian(金币+1): 谢谢参与
普通表情 高级回复 (可上传附件)
信息提示
请填处理意见